that's of course true. but two details are against it:
- if you really know what you want, you'll want to design your own patch
for that, and won't take any other already made programs
- but if you go for it, you'll spend your time programming the mixer,
instead of the project you were thinking of in the first place.
I would guess that unless someone has a project with lots of time (enough
time to program a nice complex mixer in between), it might be better to
turn to another program, like ardour. E.g. and use my patch to control
ardour, for example :)
Some programs can be very well integrated into pd, so it's not always
needed to reinvent the window.
There is a very simple and oft-overlooked point to reinventing such programmes inside of pd : it gives you a mixing tool that becomes endlessly reconfigurable, and it gives you components that are useful inside of pd patches that aren't fundamentally about mixing.
I doubt that Pd users are the kind of people who use any ordinary tools while NOT thinking : « hey, if I had this in Pd, I could be plugging [whatever~] into it, or I could plug this mixer into blahblah.pd ».
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801